Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Rambi who wrote (79205)	4/29/2000 12:07:00 AM
From: epicure	Respond to of 108807

Now now- we don't judge WOMEN, only men. Silly Rambi. You should know that. Double standards and crazy thinking- that's what you need to get.

To: Rambi who wrote (79205)	4/29/2000 12:26:00 PM
From: lorrie coey	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 108807

I'm saying that the dude moved on... Juan started a new family. Elizabeth did not- Elizabeth was dedicated to Elian, alone.

To: Rambi who wrote (79205)	4/29/2000 1:51:00 PM
From: Ilaine	Respond to of 108807

Parents have the right, protected by the United States constitution, to parent their own children. >> Moore v East Cleveland 431 US 494 (1977) The Court has long recognized that freedom of personal choice in matters of marriage and family life is one of the liberties protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. A host of cases, tracing their lineage to Meyer v. Nebraska and Pierce v. Society of Sisters have consistently acknowledged a "private realm of family life which the state cannot enter." When the government intrudes on choices concerning family living arrangements, the Court must examine carefully the importance of the governmental interests advanced. Stanley v Illinois 405 US 645 (1972) The private interest here, that of a man in the children he has sired and raised, undeniably warrants deference and protection. The integrity of the family unit has found protection in the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment, the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment, and the 9th Amendment. Wisconsin v Yoder 406 US 205 (1972) In this case involving the rights of Amish parents to provide for private schooling of their children, the Court held: "The history and culture of Western civilization reflect a strong tradition of parental concern for the nurture and upbringing of their children. This primary role of the parents in the upbringing of their children is now established beyond debate as an enduring American tradition." Prince v Massachusetts 321 US 158 (1944) It is cardinal with us that the custody, care and nurture of the child reside first in the parents, whose primary function and freedom include preparation for obligations the state can neither supply nor hinder. And it is in recognition of this that these decisions have respected the private realm of family life which the state cannot enter. Skinner v Oklahoma 316 US 535 (1942) "We are dealing here with legislation which involves one of the basic civil rights of man. Marriage and procreation are fundamental to the very existence and survival of the race." Pierce v Society of Sisters 268 US 510 (1925) The liberty of parents and guardians to direct the upbringing and education of children was abridged by a proposed statute to compell public education. "The fundamental theory of liberty upon which all governments in this Union repose excludes any general power of the state to standardize its children by forcing them to accept instruction from public teachers only. The child is not the mere creature of the state; those who nurture him and direct his destiny have the right, coupled with the high duty, to recognize and prepare him for additional obligations." Lassiter v Department of Social Services 452 US 18 (1981) The Court's decisions have by now made plain that a parent's desire for and right to "the companionship, care, custody, and management of his or her children" is an important interest that "undeniably warrants deference and, absent a powerful countervailing interest, protection." A parent's interest in the accuracy and justice of the decision to terminate his or her parental status is, therefore, a commanding one. << home.rica.net